As much as the Tuskar Chassis model is lacking compared to the Tuskar
Rack model, the opposite problem exists for each project's model of
Node. In Tuskar, the Node model is pretty bare and useless, whereas
Ironic's Node model is much richer.
Thanks for looking that deeply into it :)
So, it's not as simple as it may initially seem :)
Ah, I should have been clearer in my statement - my understanding is that
we're scrapping concepts like Rack entirely.
That was my understanding as well. The existing Tuskar domain model was
largely placeholder/proof of concept and didn't necessarily reflect
exactly what was desired/expected.
Mainn
Best,
-jay
[1]
https://github.com/openstack/ironic/blob/master/ironic/db/sqlalchemy/models.py
[2]
https://github.com/openstack/ironic/blob/master/ironic/db/sqlalchemy/models.py#L83
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
